The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling: Chapter 7: What If You're Wrong?
3/28/23 - 1h 4m - PDF Transcript
�persona.
ԱԳԵ butkan re milla Ե,
ԱԳԵ a nice church...
And you walk west from Lawn Market, of a cobblestone street to Castle Hill.
There, in the shadow of an ancient castle, on most days you'll find a tour guide
wearing a black pointy witch's hat.
The tourists gather around her, forming a little half moon as they pull out their phones and cameras
to take pictures of a small stone monument.
The Witch's Well, commemorates an especially deadly series of witch hunts
and is dedicated to those who were put to death, many in this very place centuries ago.
They were tied to states, they were strangled and then they were burnt as witches.
Throughout Scotland more than 4,000 people were accused of being witches
and more than half of them were executed.
We don't know exact numbers because in some accounts it just says sundry witches,
not even dignify them with a name.
These sorts of witch trials have occurred throughout human history and around the world
where someone, most often a woman, was accused by her community, by her neighbors,
sometimes by her own husband or children, of being a witch,
which left her with a terrible decision.
She could confess and beg for mercy from the authorities,
which in some cases spared her life,
but in others only confirmed her guilt and led to her execution.
Or she could stand firm through her interrogation
and often torture and say to the crowd,
I am not what you say I am,
though this was often seen as a prideful lack of repentance,
which could also lead to her execution.
Regardless of her choice, one feature of many of these witch hunts
was that the very accusation itself was ultimately her condemnation.
Hi, Megan.
Hi, Stacy. Thank you so much for speaking with me.
I'm delighted to join you.
This is Stacy Schiff, Pulitzer Prize winning biographer
and author of The Witches, Salem, 1692.
Stacy, you published this book in 2016,
and I just wonder, was there something specific
that made you want to research and write this book
about witch trials at this specific moment in time?
There just seemed to me to be so many obvious
and not so obvious parallels between that moment
and basically what we do today on social media.
And I think what I was most struck by was the sense that oral culture
and social media were very similar
and the ability to slander someone,
to just really decimate someone's reputation very easily
was something that was a constant between 1692
and the world in which we were then living when I started writing.
In America, the witch trials that occurred in Salem, Massachusetts
are by far the most infamous.
It was there that a zealous group of fundamentalists,
the Puritans, turned on one another
and in the span of months,
accused over 200 people of witchcraft
and as Stacy writes in her book,
one of the forces behind this panic
was an almost paranoid sense of constant danger.
One can't overstate how important was the concept of watchfulness.
You were meant to be always watchful, always vigilant,
not only for the sake of your soul,
but obviously in the Massachusetts incarnation
for the sake of your safety.
The Puritans believed that evil was lurking all around them,
constantly tempting them with sinfulness
that could damn their souls,
but also because they were living on the edge of this new colony
in a land whose native people were hostile to their presence,
they were also living constantly on guard
against a real threat of physical danger.
But there was always a sense that you were under assault
or that you were likely to be infiltrated
or that the enemy was just beyond your means.
So there is this constant sense of being on the watchtowers
and needless to say, when you're watching for something
and you're watching vigilantly for something,
you often see something.
But Stacy's book makes clear
just how different the people of Salem were
from the image of the ignorant, pitchfork-wielding mob.
In fact, they could be obsessive about reading and legal theory
and the witch-trial judges themselves
were well-educated men, a number of them, at Harvard.
I think one of the oddities about New England
in the 17th century and the question of witchcraft
is that you're talking about
one of the most literate communities in the history of the world,
possibly the most literate community in the history of the world
and it was imperative that everyone pray
and in order to pray, one had to read.
So the literacy rate was tremendously high.
Moreover, the people who were the witchcraft experts that year,
which is largely to say the clergy,
are all of the immensely erudite people
who have read everything that was to be read
on the subject of witchcraft.
So it's a funny paradox in the sense that you have
a community who are invested most in this,
what we would today call delusion,
those individuals are in fact the best-read,
most highly-educated members of the community.
And what role did courts and laws
and the concept of justice play in this society?
Justice is central to Puritanism.
The court records from the early years of New England
are almost laughably comprehensive
and you see that even in the absence of lawyers
because there were no lawyers yet
in the point in Massachusetts history,
you have a very, very law-loving, court-loving society.
And because they were so literate and so litigious,
Stacy Schiff in researching her book
was able to read their letters, their journals,
their court records,
and gain a deeper insight into how they understood themselves.
In your best judgment,
what do you think is the most gracious understanding
that they thought they were up to
when they prosecuted these witches?
I think that what we tend to forget
is how strongly the belief in witchcraft
really penetrates this community
and how thoroughly and I think profoundly
everyone involved believed that he was doing something
that was good for the community.
We have some indication that they were unclear
about how to prosecute witchcraft
and how they will at times, one justice in particular,
they at times will appeal to the ministry
to ask what kind of evidence
they can rely upon in the courtroom
and how a witchcraft diagnosis could and should be made.
And obviously there were people here
who must have trumped up charges,
but for the most part,
all of the judicial techniques which should have been followed
were followed.
It's really fascinating again
about which trial is looking back.
We assume, I mean, the idea that they would be
strenuously adhering to the rules of evidence
and things that they had in place at the time
that they were really trying to do the right thing,
in other words, that's not the image that we get.
No, but you can see them grappling
with their consciences
and you can see them grappling with the testimony.
Arthur Miller actually makes a really interesting point
when he's talking about the crucible
and he talks about something which is so true
that you're in Salem, which is that you,
in the course of these kinds of prosecutions,
you can take on the characteristics of the thing that you abhor.
You become the thing that you most fear.
That's really the scariest part of all this, right?
Is that totally you could have people
who are again very smart, very well educated,
like very dedicated to the idea of justice,
to the idea that they want to do the right thing
and to be searching themselves so deeply
for what the right answer is
and how they should behave
and to still come to this kind of horrifying conclusion
where you have 19 people hanged
and it's a terrifying thing to realize
about what it means to be human.
After you have done all of your homework,
asked all of the authorities for their help
and essentially scoured your soul
and you still can make that kind of colossal error.
I was so ill-equipped for what happened to me.
I was living in a state of real tension
that I couldn't express to many people.
So, looking back, would you say that
the Christian parents were maybe part of a moral panic?
Yeah, absolutely. It's a scary world out there.
People can make mistakes. People can do bad things.
I was so ill-equipped for what happened to me.
I was living in a state of real tension
that I couldn't express to many people.
So, looking back, would you say that
people can make mistakes, people can do bad things?
In fact, show me the human being who hasn't.
You're trashing someone, but you feel like you're crusading.
I believe absolutely that there is something dangerous
about this movement.
Someone like her, she really is just truly at the heart,
bigoted, hiding in this sheep's costume,
pretending that she is an ally.
You're trying to have your views challenged.
Completely. I'm looking at this.
I'm thinking, am I missing something?
Just the opposite of everything that she wrote into those books.
I have a lot of hope for her.
There's part of me that still cares what she thinks, you know?
Chapter 7
What if you're wrong?
Months after my first visit,
my producers and I went back to Scotland,
back to Rowling's home,
back to her drawing room with her colour-coordinated books,
to have one more conversation with her for this series.
I wanted to ask her some of the questions from her critics
and to help me understand how she,
someone who has devoted so much of her life's work
to exploring human nature,
grapples with the fact that she might be wrong.
Alright.
We've gathered here today.
Record.
Sound good.
What do you think is the crux of the difference
between what you believe and what your critics say you believe?
Oh, my God, I mean, the crux, there's an abyss.
I've been accused, I've been...
I have to laugh because the hyperbole is so extreme.
I've been told, I wish,
for the genocide of trans people,
I've been told, well, you want them to die,
you don't want them to exist.
And that, I think, is where we become...
It's not even infuriated.
Sometimes you feel a little despair.
You think maybe we need the storm to break
and for people to say,
but wait a moment, we do need to ask questions.
We've seen thousands of percent increase
in young women trying to escape their physical bodies.
Should we not be asking why that's happening?
I think the idea is that you have become,
for a lot of people,
the word is problematic,
that you might think of yourself as raising these valid concerns,
but they will criticise either the way you've gone about it
or the timing of it
or the language you've used and much more.
But before we get into some specifics,
I did just want to ask,
at this point,
how does it feel that there is this gulf
between how you see yourself
and how many other people now see you?
This will sound like an indirect answer,
but I promise you it isn't.
If I think about the people I most admire,
actually even the writers I most admire,
when it mattered, they stood up,
they didn't sit at home
and worry about their royalties
or worry about their public image greatly.
Not that I seek to be controversial,
that's as embarrassing as seeking to be
some sort of perfect.
I never wanted to be famous.
So if you're very invested in that,
then, of course, this is going to destroy you.
I mean, I don't say this in any self-aggrandising way,
but I think it could have destroyed some people.
If that's where you're very invested,
what has happened to me in the last few years,
I think there's no hope that you will come out of it
with your mental health intact
or that you wouldn't be, you know,
offering fulsome apologies.
I've learned, I've done better.
I understand that whether you mean it or not, you know that.
But now I have learned,
I did my learning before I spoke.
Everyone can do better.
I don't set out to cause pain,
but I see pain being caused
and I think damage being caused to women and girls
and I just can't sit here and not speak.
One of your critics is a trans woman named Natalie Wynne,
who goes by the name ContraPoints on YouTube,
and she made a long video essay critiquing your views on trans issues.
And in it, she goes through how she understands bigotry,
which she breaks down into two categories,
direct bigotry and indirect bigotry.
Direct bigotry is the sort of thing that my family does,
being openly contemptuous
and using slurs and demonizing people,
marginalizing people openly.
And indirect bigotry is things like
people are just asking questions,
they're just concerned,
they're engaging in debate,
activists have gone too far,
political correctness, cancel culture.
In other words, it's the idea that there are bad actors
who can hide behind virtues or less extreme rhetoric,
but who are still undermining people's rights.
I see this constantly and the most frequent example of that
is they're pretending to be concerned about children.
It's not about the children,
they really hate trans people.
Now, if you're saying that indirect bigotry
is asking questions
where you believe significant harm is done,
if you're saying indirect bigotry
is standing up for women's rights,
then you know what, guilty is charged.
I think it is a very bad faith argument to say
that people who are asking questions
are being indirect bigots
because, you know,
that itself in my view is a very bad faith position.
Do you think that some people do use those kinds of,
like I guess I'm thinking here of like actual,
people that most people would recognise as bigotry?
Pretty much everyone in the world
bar literal psychopaths
and clear terrible predators
are concerned about harm to children.
So that's a very common human trait.
It's a human trait to want to protect the vulnerable
and children are very vulnerable.
The trouble is, you see,
one may use concern about children
to justify other actions.
You know, QAnon felt
that children were being trafficked and raped.
One may be concerned about children
and be correct.
People around Jimmy Savile,
the UK's most famous predator,
believed children were being harmed,
but his celebrity and his ability
to raise money for charity was such
that nobody wanted to look into that.
So I'm not sure it's as simple as saying
people are using it.
Some people may genuinely believe
children are being harmed
and also genuinely not want anyone to be trans.
That is not my position.
You have said that you respect trans people.
You said that you would march with them.
That you think the transition is right for some people.
But you also say that there's a real difference
between biological women and trans women
and a meaningful distinction between the two
in their experiences.
And I think some of your critics point to that
and say, you're essentially making trans women
second-class women.
You know, like you're almost women
that despite all of their efforts
to live in the world as women,
as what feels right and authentic to them,
you are essentially saying,
I'll treat you as a woman.
You are an honorary woman.
But this distinction that you are emphasizing,
the biological distinction
that you see as being so important,
it can feel hurtful to them.
Like they are, you know, almost a thing.
But not quite.
Like something is being held back.
Can you understand the pain that that could cause?
Yes, is the short answer.
Yes, I can understand that hurt.
The thing is, women are the only group
to my knowledge that are being asked
to embrace members of their oppressor class
unquestioningly with no caveat.
Now, on an individual basis,
and I think many people new to this argument
would see it on that level
because many people of my generation particularly
think that we're talking about old-school transsexuals,
people who've been through full sex reassignment
because of profound gender dysphoria.
And I feel 100% compassion for such people
and I would absolutely respect
their pronouns, always have, always will,
and would want, as I say, them to have comfortable, easy lives.
This movement, though, is pressing for something different,
very different.
This movement has argued, continues to argue
that a man may have had no surgery whatsoever.
But if he feels himself to be a woman,
the door of every woman's bathroom, changing room,
rape centre should be open to him.
I say no, I'm afraid I say no.
And we are in a cultural moment
where that individual's hurt is being prioritised
over the hurt of women whose rights and boundaries
are under sustained assault.
And I think it's interesting to ask why
the pain of one group is being prioritised
over the pain of other groups.
Yeah, maybe a simpler way to ask it is that
is there a way in your mind to respect both pains,
even though at some point obviously there's going to be
a moment where action or decision has to be made.
I do believe that there is a way forward
in which women and girls retain their existing rights
and trans people are properly protected.
There is a way, absolutely a way to respect both points
but I think we're currently unfortunately
at a place where that is very difficult to achieve.
I believe feminists have tried very hard
to have this discussion.
How do we ensure everyone's rights and safety?
Where does fairness lie?
For example in issues like sport would be a very obvious one
and getting a lot of publicity at the moment.
Feminists are asking for certain spaces,
rape shelters would be a very obvious example
to remain female only or to have separate provision
for both groups because I don't know a single feminist
who doesn't acknowledge that trans people also,
of course, are victims of sexual violence.
But at the moment there seems to be a very black and white
view on the other side of the argument.
It's everything or nothing.
When it comes to the bathroom question,
we've heard from a lot of people that essentially
that the risks just don't seem very high to them.
Many of them can understand why, you know,
males and females shouldn't be housed in the same prison cells
but when it comes to bathrooms like there already aren't guards
at the door and like nobody's checking before we go in
and essentially a bad actor would come in regardless
of whatever our conventions are.
There is a social taboo.
There has been until very recently historically,
there has been a social taboo so that if my husband
decided that he wanted to use the ladies bathroom,
the women inside would feel confident in challenging
his right to be there and I think in my view
most decent men watching a man walking into
the ladies bathroom might well challenge him too.
That is now being eroded.
So we have statistics on this.
The Sunday Times issued a freedom of information
request from the government.
88% of sexual assaults happen in unisex spaces.
We have had multiple...
The Sunday Times data rolling is referencing
specifically addressed reported sexual assaults,
harassment and voyeurism in changing rooms
at sports centers and swimming pools
and compared the rates of incidents that occurred
in single sex versus unisex changing rooms.
We have had multiple instances in this country
and in America because I went and looked
because I was thinking well does this happen
and it happens, voyeurism, sexual assault.
The men particularly arguing that this isn't a risk
alarm me candidly, are they naïve?
Do they not know what their fellow men do?
There are a lot of critics who say
you and your comments are giving fuel to the right.
Well, my answer would be
I think you're giving fuel to the right.
This is why many left-wing feminists
in particular are sitting with their head in their hands.
The right has wanted for years and years and years
not all of the right but certainly the further right
and the religious right have wanted to castigate
the lesbian and gay and bisexual movement
is inherently degenerate
and part of the left's broader degeneracy.
When you defend the placing
of rapists in cells with women
you are handing the right a perfect opportunity
to say you see we told you the moral degeneracy
that would result if you say
homosexual relationships are okay
and I think for many leftists, for many feminists
we are despairing of the fact
that people are in our view
colluding with a deeply misogynist movement
which is benefitting politically speaking
the far right.
And I worry very deeply
that as the left becomes increasingly puritanical
and authoritarian and judgmental
we are pushing swathes of people towards not just the right
it's pushing them to the outright
that's what scares me
that particularly young men
when they're being told everything in the world is their fault
and they have no right to a voice
and they are everything that is wrong with society
it is unfortunately a human reaction
to go to the place where you will be embraced
and if the only place where you can make a joke
or be accepted
is a place that is full of poisonous ideas
then you're likely to go there
particularly when you're young
so I think that the left is making a tremendous mistake
in espousing this kind of
in my view quasi religious
incredibly witch hunting behaviour
because there will be people who will just feel
when they've been shamed and abused
and they feel it was unfair
where are they going to go
that worries me very deeply
in my life time
we've seen such a shift on the left
and I still would define myself as of the left
but you know I was born in the sixties
when transgression really was the preserve of the left
you know when challenging authority
and making the dark joke
and breaking societal norms
was very much the preserve of the left
I've lived to see
the left become incredibly puritanical
and rigid
and watching the alt right
and this is a new phenomenon
the alt right is not the conservative right
with whom I disagree on many many things
I'm just saying we're seeing a growth of something
very much facilitated by the internet
that alarms and disturbs me
and it worries me that the left are absolutely playing
into that demographic's hands
you wrote a book, many books
where young children have a lot of autonomy
make very adult decisions
and some of them come with really great risks
and that's like sneaking off into a dungeon
or running away to fight the most powerful wizard
who has ever existed
and some of your critics wonder
if there's something contradictory
in saying that young people are not old enough
to know who they are
to make this decision about
whether to medically transition
those are fantasy books
the point of fantasy is
that we are allowed to explore in imagination
things that frighten us, challenge us
we're allowed to escape into a world that's scary
but then we can come back, we can close the book
we can think about what we've read
we can think about what it means to make irreversible decisions
by contrast
we are dealing with the real world here
we're dealing with children in my view
being persuaded
that a solution for all distress
is lifelong medicalization
that is real world harm
there's no closing the book and walking away
there's no playing with this
experimenting with this
and not suffering harm
in my view
now people will say
perhaps but you've already said
that for some people this will be the answer
and I will say yes
for the persistent gender dysphoria
I believe
I certainly hope
that for adults who have found no other way
to resolve their gender dysphoria
transition may be the answer
I want to see those people protected
I want their rights protected
I wish them lives full of joy
and fulfillment
but when we're talking about children
I think that is a very different question
now you've said that
you've been immersing yourself in a lot of reading
arts and philosophy and academic literature
all around this subject
and I know that one thing
that's made this conversation about
minors medically transitioning
so contentious is that
because it's quite new
there aren't a lot of authoritative studies
and so with the studies that are out there
the assertion is that people on all sides
are cherry picking to fit their arguments
what evidence are you seeing
that you are right to be worried
I haven't yet found a study
that hasn't found
that the majority of young people
children and adolescents
experiencing gender dysphoria
will grow out of it
now that I haven't found a single study
that contradicts that
and I have gone looking
the majority of children will if allowed
to go through adolescence
many of them will grow up to
not all but many will grow up to be gay
and their gender dysphoria will resolve
why then if that's the evidence
are we immediately putting
children on to an affirmative path
can we follow the science
there's activism
and all activism isn't equal
I genuinely think
that we are watching one of the worst medical scandals
in a century
and I believe that those who should have known better
and I'm talking here not
God knows about trans people
gender dysphoria people
distressed young people
I'm certainly not talking about them
I am talking about medics
and those who have cheered this on unquestioningly
creating a climate in which
many people trying to raise red flags
have been intimidated and silenced
and I would ask
proponents of gender identity ideology
who are so militant
who are so determined on no debate
I would ask them
what if you are wrong
if I'm wrong
honestly hallelujah
if I'm wrong
great
people aren't being harmed
but if you are wrong
you have cheered on
you have created a climate
quite a threatening climate
in which whistleblowers
and young people themselves
have been intimidated out of raising concerns
I think it was in 2018
Professor Carl Hennigan
who is of the Oxford Centre
for Evidence-Based Medicine
and he spoke up publicly
and he said
we are watching an unregulated
live experiment on children
he was instantly condemned as a transphobe
by I think the Oxford University's
LGBT society
so when you say that people aren't being harmed
you are wrong
you mean physically
because your critics say
that you are harming people
with your words
and with the ideas that you are promoting
well I actually
I received an email right after I spoke out
in which a left wing man I know
emailed me and he said
a trans man had been killed in Germany
and he said to me
your rhetoric contributes to an environment
in which police are less likely to investigate that crime
now join the dots for me
what I had said at that point is
there used to be a word
for people who menstruate
is he genuinely arguing
that by saying women menstruate
police investigating murder will say
well better wrap up the investigation
these hyperbolic accusations
are thrown at anyone who challenges this ideology
your words will cause people to kill themselves
your words will stop police investigation
your words will cause men
to be violent trans women
blaming women for the violence of men
is a hallmark of something
that is not normally seen as progressive
that is misogyny writ large
to go back to your concern
about the left feeding a backlash
that might help the far right
there's been a real and rapid loss
of public trust and institutions of all kinds
over the past few years
and it sounds like this experience you're having
is causing you yourself to have doubts
about the trustworthiness
of some of our institutions in this moment
completely and I think that this is
I mean we've seen this play out in the last decade
this undermining of experts
you know the experts can't be trusted
the media can't be trusted
governments can't be trusted
and I would be lying if I didn't say
that I have lost faith in certain institutions
I have lost a degree of faith in
what is obviously the industry I know best
the publishing industry
I've been shocked by the positions
that publishing has taken
I am pleased and proud to say
my publisher has taken
my editor in fact has taken
a robust position on freedom of speech
and I was relieved that he took that position
not for my sake but it was a declaration
on freedom of speech that I think publishing
if publishers stand for nothing else
they should stand for plurality of views
and the other institutions that I have
definitely lost faith in are educational institutions
who I think have taken
a very dogmatic position on this
and are shutting down debate
freedom of thought and freedom of expression
and I
if we cannot look to those institutions
to protect those very precious things
we are in trouble and I am afraid
I think we are currently in trouble
well one of the concerns you voiced
is around language
and institutions using phrases like
birthing people or cervix havers
or people who menstruate
and some of your critics just don't see a problem with this
they see it as just making language
more inclusive
so for instance in the world of journalism
the Associated Press released a new style guide
explaining that when referring to transgender people
phrases like is a woman
are more to the point than
identifies as a woman
can you make the case to the skeptic
why is this an issue for you
that from the Associated Press
is hugely powerful
they've edged from identify as a woman
so a man identifies as a woman
and I think we all understand what that means
into is a woman
and that's precisely the creep
that I'm talking about
we are using language
to make accurate definition of sex difference
unspeakable
when I read news stories
women convicted of exposing her penis
on the street
now I'm laughing but it's not actually that funny
I hear myself saying the words
and that seems so absurd to me
but there is now a journalistic convention
that no matter the crime
women convicted of raping small boy
these are real news stories
I see that as political language
I see that as an ideological
I don't believe it to be factual
there's a body of feminists
who would say these are not our crimes
these are not women's crimes
and I would say something else
I don't believe you can accurately analyse
sexual violence or violence
when committed by males
and we know that 98 to 99%
of sexual violence is committed by men
women are
form 88% of victims of sexual violence
how can we record accurate data
how can we analyse this phenomenon
without being able to accurately talk
about who is the perpetrator
and who is the victim
so what you're saying is that
by changing the language there
to focus especially around sex crimes
to focus on gender rather than sex
you are obscuring an important fact
which is that biology actually is implicated there
exactly that
one of the things that your critics say often
is some version of
I wish you would listen
why isn't she listening to us
because
they think that
nobody could possibly disagree with them
if they heard what they were saying
and I truly believe
that the notion that I have listened
and I have read and I have learnt
and I've looked at the theory
and I've looked at personal accounts
and still disagree
is simply anathema
so what you're saying is
they think they want you to listen
when really they want you to agree
I'm afraid that isn't exactly what I think
and then the other extremely common question
that comes up
and it comes off almost like a plea
is just why
why are you doing this
why can't you just let people be who they are
and support them the way that you do
for these outsider characters in your book
if one of those people is listening right now
how would you talk to them
what would you say to them
can you speak to them
I would say to them
you as a human being
the self that you are
I have the utmost respect for you
I want you protected
I want you safe
I would treat you with respect always
and I would say
I'm worried
I'm worried that we're
I'm worried that you yourself
may have got caught up in something
that may ultimately harm you
but I'm asking some questions
I think some vulnerable groups
are being harmed
and that includes the gay community
that includes vulnerable women
and it includes vulnerable youth
now if you identify as trans
if that is an answer for you
then I'm with you 100%
but we are seeing mounting evidence
that this is not the answer for everyone
and that we may be living through a cultural moment
that we will look back on
not with pride
but with puzzlement
that we let it happen
We'll be right back.
This podcast is supported by Athletic Greens
I am a person who can be
pretty obsessive about my health
my routine typically includes
things like 10,000 steps a day
and smoothies and strength workouts
and yes, I am even one of those people
who forces myself to take cold showers
even in the winter
but a lot of that flew out the window
when I had a baby six months ago
and I especially struggled to make sure
that I was getting good nutrition
that's why I was so excited
to add AG1 from Athletic Greens
to my routine
I love that I can get 75 vitamins, minerals
and nutrients from whole food sources
just by adding a scoop of AG1
to my smoothie in the morning
or mixing it with a glass of cold water
it's a really simple habit to get into
and it's so much easier
than swallowing a bunch of pills
which is what I did for years
and came to completely dread
AG1 is different
I feel grateful that even during the most chaotic times in my life
I can do this small, powerful thing
to help me cover my nutritional bases every day
if you're looking for an easier way to take supplements
Athletic Greens is giving you a free one-year supply
of vitamin D and five free travel packs
with your first purchase
go to athleticgreens.com
slash witch trials
that's athleticgreens.com
slash witch trials
here at the free press
we know firsthand how difficult it is
to manage all of the operations of our business
and how important it is to have visibility
and control over our financials
businesses like ours just can't afford
not to know our numbers
and that's why we would love to tell you about NetSuite
NetSuite by Oracle is the number one
cloud financial system to power your growth
and it's trusted by over 33,000 companies
NetSuite has everything you need to grow
all in one place
with NetSuite you can automate your processes
and close your books in no time
while staying well ahead of your competition
93% of surveyed businesses
cited increased visibility and control
after upgrading to NetSuite
so on behalf of the free press
if you run a business
and you need a best in class financial system
we strongly recommend NetSuite
go to netsuite.com
slash witch trials
we are ready to upgrade to the number one
financial system for growing businesses
you can learn more about NetSuite's new
2023 financing program
at netsuite.com
slash witch trials
that's netsuite.com
slash witch trials
this podcast is supported by fastgrowingtrees.com
I had to make a confession to my husband
before I married him
I do not have a good history with plants
specifically with keeping them alive
and now that our daughter is four years old
I wanted to make sure that my
arboreal deficiencies
aren't passed along for another generation
and here's where fastgrowingtrees.com comes in
fastgrowingtrees.com
showed us our growing zone
based on our location
and then we use the plant finder
to help us choose the perfect trees
for little hands to help tend
who sadly miss the genes for a green thumb
fastgrowingtrees.com
has plant experts who curate
thousands of easy to grow plant
shrub and tree varieties for each
unique climate from apple trees
to evergreens and everything in between
plus their plant experts
are always available to help keep
our plants growing healthy
throughout the season and beyond
and I can't wait to harvest our mire lemons
and key limes with my little girl when the time comes
you can join over
1.5 million happy
fastgrowingtrees customers
by going to fastgrowingtrees.com
slash witch trials now
to get 15% off your entire order
get 15% off
at fastgrowingtrees.com
slash witch trials
I'm really interested in the question of discernment
I think of this scene from one of your books
that was Harry Potter in the Order of the Phoenix
where Hermione
the hero and professor Umbridge
who is clearly in the wrong
have this showdown in class
Hermione says in a moment of defiance
that she disagrees with something in her textbook
and Umbridge berates her
like who are you
to disagree with this expert
who wrote this textbook and punishes her
now to anyone reading this
it is so frustrating and unjust
but I venture to say
that no one thinks they are the Umbridge
no one ever thinks that
no one ever thinks they're Umbridge
and some people see you as the Umbridge
you have these younger critics online
and they see Hermione
as standing up to an older person
with power
and they see themselves
as standing up to you
yeah and I understand
because they've told me very explicitly
how do you why they have
interpretation
how do you know if you are a Hermione
or an Umbridge
well if you're having a lot of fun
doing it and getting a huge sense
of self satisfaction out of it
then I do believe
you may be want to stop and think
am I getting a huge ego rush out of this
that would be a good question
to ask yourself
you know is this giving me pleasure
because I can say from my heart
none of this has given me pleasure
it has given me anxiety
it has made me
at times feel vulnerable
so although I don't regret
anything I've had concerns
for my family's safety
some of the threats have not been
too amusing to me
there has been fallout
in my life inevitably
I still don't regret
standing up but I don't
it certainly hasn't given me pleasure
on any level
you know
one of the key moments for me
so you say
you talk about righteousness
there was an incident in 2019
I believe
here Rowling mentioned the incident
that we spoke about in chapter 4
where in a nearby Scottish town
a 10 year old girl
was sexually assaulted
by an 18 year old trans woman
in a public bathroom
some of the discourse I saw after that incident
really took me aback
because one of the first things I saw was
the turfs love it
when something like this happens
now
what thought process
has led you to believe
that the turfs
the demonised evil group
they just hate trans people
they want them all dead
we all know this, that's who they are
what leads you to believe
they want 10 year old children
escape rape
by a hares whisker
how has your black and white thinking
evolved to the point where you think
that
feminists like me
actively are gleeful
when women are raped or attacked
that's great we can use this
to bash trans women with
and I've seen that discourse
and I think if you're thinking
is that
it's not just irrational
that it's such a bad faith position
at no point
do you stop and say to yourself
there may be some nuance here
is this all moving pieces
on a chess board for you
is it all a game
does real world hurt and harm
not count at all
there's one other question
that I had about discernment
so how do you know if you're fighting
for something that is truly righteous
or just something that appears to be righteous
how do you know that the courage
to call out an injustice
isn't actually just a call to join
an unjust mob
so coming from westboro
where I believed so strongly
that I was doing the right thing
and then to leave and come to believe
that it was so destructive and harmful
I had this moment
in time and it lasted
for many months
where I was like how can I
trust my own mind again
because I was so certain
and so I was trying to
looking for some kind of solid footing
like what leg do I have
to stand on
how can I trust my mind
how do I not make the same mistake again and again
going forward
and so I basically came up with this list
of questions that kind of grew over time
and a few of them you've alluded to already
so these are the questions that I asked myself
to see like
am I starting to go down a bad path
so the first question is
are you capable of entertaining real
doubt about your beliefs
or are you operating from a position of certainty
yeah and I think that
that's key
I think it's when we are most certain
and when we're getting that rush of adrenaline
that says god I'm a good person
that's when we should most
question ourselves
that's when you need to stop
and ask yourself a question
and the second point is
can you articulate the evidence that you would need
to see in order to change your position
or is your perspective
unfalsifiable
we've discussed this already and I think that's
such a good question
because I asked myself that question
on this issue
what would I need to see and I could articulate
what I would need to see
to move me
from my position
my thought out position
or opponents perspective in a way that they recognize
or are you straw manning
and I think that's excellent
and I genuinely believe
I could articulate
my opponents position
because I've read their books
and I think people need to read
these things they need to understand
what is being argued
fourth one was are you attacking ideas
or attacking the people who hold them
always the ideas
are you willing to cut off close relationships
with people who disagree with you
particularly over relatively small
points of contention
no I'm not
a difference of belief is nothing to me
but I can imagine myself
no longer wishing to have a relationship
with a person who behaved
in certain ways towards me or towards others
because I do strongly believe
it's
watch what people are doing not what they're saying
and so certain behaviors
would probably be a deal breaker for me
and that would include
demonizing others
for small transgressions
that would be a revelation
to me that that person wasn't who I thought
they were probably
and then the last one was
are you willing to use extraordinary
means against people who disagree with you
and by that I mean things like forcing people
out of their jobs or homes
you know violence or threats of violence
or things like what my family and I did
celebrating misfortune and tragedy
I don't know why but that question has actually
made me quite emotional that you say that to me
because I sit opposite you and I like you so much
and you're such a humane
and reasonable person
and to hear you
describing those behaviors is
I can really understand
why you had your long dark night of the soul
one thing that you said to me earlier
in our discussion really stuck with me
you said to me that not long before you left
you said to someone
an interviewer
I'm all in
and you told me
I believed that I had questioned myself
and I was fine with everything
but you said you hadn't
gone deep enough trust and obey
you'd never actually
taken apart the most fundamental
three words of your belief system
you'd never challenged those
can you talk about that
because that really interests me
yeah, so
I grew up in a family
of lawyers
so my mom is one of 13
and I think 11 of the 13
went to law school they were very
very smart, very analytical
very logical people
which I think surprised a lot of people
to learn
because it's easy to assume
that these are just kind of rednecks
backwards beliefs or something
and specifically with unexamined beliefs
these are just their personal prejudices
and they're living them out in the world
when in fact my grandfather
was a well-known
award-winning civil rights
attorney
he was somebody who had reason to believe
that he was on the right side of things
on a lot of things
and we were constantly looking around
at what other people believed
and other understandings of the bible
and then going back to the word
to the king james version of the bible
and trying to show
and memorizing chapter and verse
why everybody else was wrong
all the evidence so it was a constant
process of examination
asking these questions
but I realized before I left
that there were two fundamental
premises of our ideology
that I never
questioned
I never truly questioned
the idea that the bible was the literal
word of god
and that west bro's understanding of it
was the right one because again
it was all laid out there for me
and as much as many questions
as I asked
from those two premises essentially
everything else basically fell into place
there were a few
small contradictions that outsiders
were able to find on twitter
and I do wonder
like if not
for some internal contradiction
relatively small points
if that had never
revealed themselves to me
they'd never revealed themselves to me
then I would have just accepted
I would never have thought to question
those two basic premises
that actually is one of the reasons
that I came up with this list
because if I asked myself
all these hard questions
what I imagined
I really thought I was digging in deep
it was really terrifying
to realize
even when you're really trying
even when it's an earnest
attempt
and all of your intellect
and again I'm surrounded by people
who are all incredibly intelligent
and well intentioned
I know those people
we would do anything for each other
so it's just
the idea that such people
could still get to a place
that was so wrong
and so destructive
it helps me I guess
now feel a lot of
understanding and grace for people
even when they're doing harmful things
so it's that question about
are you talking ideas or the people who hold them
that is very
it's huge to me because
of the way that people were able to
understand that even though
I was doing horrible things
I was trying to do the right thing
and that was something that they could tap into
and so this is for me
even though it can be kind of
scary to see
what people are capable of
even when they're trying to do the right thing
it's also a hopeful thing
because that desire to do good
is something that you can tap into
which is why the desire to
shut down debate and conversation
is so alarming to me
because that is the only thing
that can ultimately change hearts and minds
and it's
I think the only real tool we have
outside of actual
force and violence to
make change
every crowd, every mob
is made up of individuals
and it's reaching the individuals
and not allowing us to become mob on mob
that will change things
for the best
if we're to have any hope
and your story obviously
is one of redemption
and I love everything that you say
and I'm good in your family
I truly do
ok very last question
why have you been willing
to talk to me
what do you hope this does
I've been willing to talk to you
specifically
because you wrote me that incredible letter
and because I think I've had
100 people at least say
explain yourself, explain yourself
but I felt that you and I
could have a conversation
that interested me
and in terms of what I hope this does
I suppose I hope people
enjoy the podcast honestly
I don't mean this in any arrogant way
and I don't mean this in any
self-pitying way
but I feel that I've said
what I've said
and maybe when the mist clears
some people will understand better
some will always
hate me for what I've said
I accept that
I know I won't ever regret
having stood up on this issue
ever
that's the price you pay
if you want
to be
universally an eternally beloved
then you must
curate your image in a way that I'm simply not prepared to do
I'm not in the business of doing that
and I'm not taking a long bet here
I'm not thinking
I think this cultural moment will pass
and therefore I will be vindicated
by the future holds
I only know that
I would have betrayed myself
and I passionately believe
I would have betrayed a lot of women and girls
if I had not stood up on this issue
there are more important things
in this world than being popular
and that doesn't mean
it's more important to me to be right
that means it's more important to me to do the right thing
Joe Rowling
thank you so much for speaking with me
thank you
are we good?
do you have anything else to say?
you've been listening to the witch trials
of JK Rowling
this series is dedicated to everyone out there
who's trying to have difficult conversations
trying to listen with empathy
and to speak with honesty
and in good faith
even when it's hard
so much has happened since we started our reporting
and we'll be back in a month or so
with a bit of an epilogue
so stay tuned
in the meantime
if this show has meant something to you
if it has moved you
or provoked you
or inspired you
or maybe caused you to question some of your assumptions
please share it with your community
share it with your friends or family
start a podcast club
discuss it, debate it
join the public conversation
as messy as it can be sometimes
and if you think we've missed something
or have recommendations for our team
please leave us a review
on apple or spotify
to help others discover the show
and now, for some thank yous
the witch trials of JK Rowling
was produced by Andy Mills
Matthew Bull
and me, Megan Phelps Roper
with production and editing support
from Candace Mattel Kahn
the series is brought to you by the free press
the show was mixed by Matthew Bull
sound design by Andy Mills
and Matthew Bull
editorial advising
by Barry Weiss
additional editing support
from Emily Yafi
original music composed and performed
by Peter Leilish
Kobe Beenert
John Ivins
and Matthew Bull
the wonderful readings from Harry Potter
and the Philosopher's Stone in episode 1
were performed by actor Crispin Letts
with special permission
from JK Rowling
our beautiful artwork was created
by Eliana Blazer-Gould
with art direction
by Suzy Weiss
fact checking by Natalie Ballard
and me
special thanks to Stephanie Roper
Kate Fjelland
Rebecca Salt
Noah Phelps Roper
Laura Floyd
Lucy Biggers
Jonathan Hunt
Isaac Grafstein
Alex Burns
Camille Foster
Aaron Bull
Katie Herzog
Jesse Single
Joy Neal
Kat Rosenfield
Lacey Green
and Jonathan Haidt
and to many patient and supportive
members of my family
including Joyce Marlin
Tor and Solvee Lynn Fjelland
Josh Phelps Roper
Nancy Taves
and Tom Kennett
and of course
our thanks to JK Rowling
for inviting us into her home
last but not least
our most profound thanks
goes to everyone who shared their stories
with us
and to our friends
who listened and give us encouragement
and feedback along the way
goodbye for now
but we'll see you all soon in the epilogue
and we're doing that by printing stories
hosting debates
and publishing a wide range of opinion pieces
all in an effort
to break out of echo chambers
and fight against confirmation bias
and see the world as the complicated
and sometimes wonderful mess
that it really is
if that sounds like something you value
become a subscriber today
www.subsedit.com
Machine-generated transcript that may contain inaccuracies.
Host Megan Phelps-Roper asks J.K. Rowling to respond to pushback from some of her critics. The two also discuss the difficulty of discernment—why it can be so hard to know what’s right.
Produced by Andy Mills, Matthew Boll, Megan Phelps-Roper, with special thanks to Candace Mittel Kahn and Emily Yoffe.
This show is proudly sponsored by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. FIRE believes free speech makes free people. Learn more at thefire.org.